Thanks Brian - would you say that the CP you use for the Terrain Roll and the CP you use for the Multiple Opponents roll must be split, or the total CP you put into a Terrain Roll would apply to both ?

In other words, if you were fighting 2 opponents on Slippery Ice, and you decided to take 4 from your CP to try to avoid slipping on the Ice, and limit the melee to one opponent, would you make 2 rolls splitting that 4 CP (however you choose), or would you use the total 4 CP dice for both rolls ?

Logged

'But the discord of Melkor rose in uproar and contended with it, and again there was a war of sound more violent than before, until many of the Ainur were dismayed and sang no longer, and Melkor had the mastery.'

If you look at it logically, those rolls have *nothing* to do with each other. Watching your step on an icy surface will not have your enemies magically change positions in your favor. So I'd call for two terrain rolls, with their respective TNs, for both of which you have to allocate your CP dice.Yes, having to carefully watch your step and try to maneuver around is difficult, to say the least. Sucks to be you. ;)

Yep, Richard has it. What a terrain roll is is you choosing to use some of your concentration for something other than attacking your opponent. The more concentration you devote to running around, or not slipping over on slippery ground, or whatever (the more dice you use on terrain rolls) the less concentration you have left for your opponent to hit him or not get hit (you have fewer dice left).

If you want to do more than one thing that needs concentration, that's even less that you have to spare your opponent, so it costs more dice.

I recall you having them split rolls ONCE. Just once. When... Slaine, I think, was barrelling up the stairs and trying to get past guards. One roll to get past the multiple opponents, and one roll to not fall down the stairs. Right?

I have to say again that the first time I read through TRoS, I was a bit "confused" - this after playing Rolemaster for years, not because it's "harder" or "chart filled", but because it is different.

The more I read, ask questions, and understand the rules, the more TRoS seems to rock......I really love the Terrain roll system.

Logged

'But the discord of Melkor rose in uproar and contended with it, and again there was a war of sound more violent than before, until many of the Ainur were dismayed and sang no longer, and Melkor had the mastery.'

So.. Thule engages Jen. Jen has no other option, so chooses NOT to engage the other mooks. Jim, also seeing this, maneuvers to engage Thule.. Suddenly the options aren't so much in his favor.

Except... does Jim have that option? Thule made his terrain roll, after all. It still sounds to me like one roll is needed for "avoiding people" and another for "catching people".

Also, what effect does sprinting vs hurried movement have on all this? If Jen is hurried and trying to avoid Thule, and Thule is willing to sprint to catch her, does that give him any significant advantage?

It sounds to me like we should use a different name for them: call them Engagement rolls, and rework the system.

The TN of an Engagement Roll is determined by the terrain, factoring in footwork stability, room to move and swing, and so on. Note that they can differ for opposing sides; three Gols trying to reach a single fighter in a narrow stairwell will have a much higher ETN than that fighter.

The successes gained on an Engagement Roll can be used for various things:

1) If you're outnumbered, every success can be used to reduce the number of opponents you're facing by 1. (Suggest increasing the max odds to 4 to 1 in this case, so you have more tension between Engagement and Attack/Defense rolls.) The opponents pick who's excluded.

2) By spending *2* successes per opponent, you can choose who gets excluded, allowing you to outflank and isolate your weakest target and cut your opponents' numbers down.

3) If you're on the outnumbering side, every success can be used to counter an opponent's success. This gives the advantage to the numbers, because a Boss can, if he chooses, simply spend 1 of his Engagement successes rather than 2; this allows him to stay in or out of the melee at his discretion....

I think you're needlessly overcomplicating something that we all like in the first place because of its simplicity.

EDITED: True, the original rule for engagement (terrain roll; success = fight 1 opponent, failure = fight 2, fumble = fight the maximum of 3) is very simple. But the fact that people are bringing in house rules at all suggests that there are aspects it doesn't cover, doesn't it?

EDITED: True, the original rule for engagement (terrain roll; success = fight 1 opponent, failure = fight 2, fumble = fight the maximum of 3) is very simple. But the fact that people are bringing in house rules at all suggests that there are aspects it doesn't cover, doesn't it?

That depends on priorities in play. I have absolutely no problem whatsoever with GM fiat on this one, which is how I run it, and how its written.

Jake, who usually makes the poor guy that gets caught be the one with the highest Move score.

Logged

"Civilized men are more discourteous than savages because they know they can be impolite without having their skulls split, as a general thing." -R.E. Howard The Tower of the Elephant___________________www.theriddleofsteel.NET